bureniafandomcom-20200215-history
User talk:Ooswesthoesbes/Gramär ankélot'apcanski
Škškom. Neprónùsiàtsibilìtsia. :P 4kant,6FRÅGOR??? 09:30, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) :Ságo dhouw :o /'ʃk̩ʃkɔm/ → syllabic consonants è :P --OuWTB 09:34, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) ::Syllabic k :o Never seen that before :o Not sure whether itś even possible :P 4kant,6FRÅGOR??? 09:36, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) :::http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllabic_consonant#Other_languages - You need to get rid of your Indo-European glasses :o --OuWTB 09:40, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) ::::However, it is not clear how one would define a syllable or a syllabic nucleus in such cases, '''and it is therefore not clear whether any of these consonants should be considered syllabic.' :P 4kant,6FRÅGOR??? 09:43, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) :::::I ain't talking bout consideration here, cuz that's something for grammarians :P Purely talking about linguistics: is there a very short vowel (yes), then it's syllabic :P --OuWTB 09:50, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) :::::: :o 4kant,6FRÅGOR??? 09:53, dÿrdëmånad 19, 2013 (UTC) Do "lania", "låp", "bòrdis" and "skùold" have defined meanings? If so, what do they mean? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:02, tìtsotsíxë 11, 2014 (UTC) :Are you patronizing me? :o --OuWTB 15:31, tìtsotsíxë 11, 2014 (UTC) ::No, I'm just asking a question :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 17:26, tìtsotsíxë 11, 2014 (UTC) :::Why are you asking me this question though? :o --OuWTB 05:12, tìtsotsíxë 12, 2014 (UTC) ::::I am asking this question out of mere curiosity :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:43, tìtsotsíxë 12, 2014 (UTC) :::::Then I will soon provide you with an answer :o --OuWTB 16:00, tìtsotsíxë 12, 2014 (UTC) ::::::Is it possible for me to, without in any way offending you and the Ankélo'tapcatâle, conclude that, at the moment at which my question was asked, the meanings of those words had not yet been defined? :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 17:24, tìtsotsíxë 12, 2014 (UTC) :::::::It is possible, but not true :o If you'd use your imagination you'd been able to define some of the words yourself :P "lania" (area), "låp" (gun), "bòrdis" (table), and "skùold" (seat). --OuWTB 08:56, tìtsotsíxë 13, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::"Låp" and "skùold" reminded me more of "loppa" and "skuld" respectively :P I suppose not all Burenian words have similar Swedish cognates :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 16:56, tìtsotsíxë 13, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::I suppose not :o --OuWTB 03:10, tìtsotsíxë 14, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::But "cassa" and "hus" áre obvious cognates though, just like "xúca" and "hund" :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:39, tìtsotsíxë 14, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::I don't see how ''càssa can be a cognate to hus while xudž would be a cognate to hund. How would the different correlate to h-'' be explicable (except for maybe the k-ḱ theory :P), as well as the loss of a nasal with nasalizing the vowel (!''xuñdž)? Also, if Burenian and Swedish were related, Burenian would be a distant relative to the entire Proto-Indo-European family, resulting in the word xudž to be more likely to come from the root instead of an inflected form such as the Germanic descendant, thus from *ḱwṓ, which would be more likely to result in a form like !cwö or perhaps, though less likely, !xwö. --OuWTB 15:16, tìtsotsíxë 14, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::Let's assume that there was a distinction between k and ḱ, even in Proto-Nostratic (assuming the Nostratic theory is true, and that Burenian is a Nostratic language, I doubt it's IE :P). Then the word for "dog" might be derived from something like *ḱwō-dja, whatever *-dja may have meant, and then it makes perfect sense. Now the next challenge is to make Hungarian kutya fit with this theory as well :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 16:46, tìtsotsíxë 14, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::I tend to disagree.. How would a labialized palatalized plosive become a plain velar fricative? That's not a logical sound change :P --OuWTB 10:20, tìtsotsíxë 15, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::I might have ignored some sound changes to PIE :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:56, tìtsotsíxë 15, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::Hahaha :P --OuWTB 05:16, tìtsotsíxë 16, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::So, to summarise: ::::::::::::::::*PIE: *ḱwṓ ::::::::::::::::*Hungarian: kutya ::::::::::::::::*Proto-Burenian: something like *xúɟa ::::::::::::::::*Proto-Nostratic: *Kúca, in which *K is some dorsal consonant. ::::::::::::::::Any comments on this? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:36, tìtsotsíxë 16, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::Yes. The -ž ending on xudž is a regular voicing of the standard ending -š. The -ɟ- phoneme makes no sense :P --OuWTB 17:18, tìtsotsíxë 16, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::Let's then assume both PIE and Ankélot'apcadijålekt to be takavíhki :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 18:00, tìtsotsíxë 16, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::Let's assume that takavíhkiness was not inherited, thus making Uškárdijålekt takavíhki :o --OuWTB 09:26, tìtsotsíxë 17, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::Because Anka didn't inherit its takavíhkiness, Uxykascardijålekt is takavíhki? That makes no sense at all :| --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:50, tìtsotsíxë 17, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::Tsssss... :P --OuWTB 16:34, tìtsotsíxë 17, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::Anyway. Here's my rekʷestruḱon for "house": ::::::::::::::::::::::*PIE: je ne sais pas ::::::::::::::::::::::*Hungarian: ház ::::::::::::::::::::::*Proto-Burenian: something like *càssa ::::::::::::::::::::::*Proto-Nostratic: K2àssa, in which K2 is some dorsal consonant, but probably not the same as above :P ::::::::::::::::::::::Comments? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 21:35, tìtsotsíxë 17, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::Hahaha, sounds good :P --OuWTB 10:54, tìtsotsíxë 18, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::Your turn: reconstruct K1 and K2 :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 12:29, tìtsotsíxë 18, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::K¹ will probably be some kind of plain k or velarized kˠ, while k² will perhaps be palatalized, like c or kʲ :o --OuWTB 09:48, tìtsotsíxë 19, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::Not sure how velarisation becomes palatalisation, but we'd already assumed PIE to be takavíhki so let's assume that it makes sense :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:00, tìtsotsíxë 19, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::Well, the PIE consonant /ḱ/ (K¹) is known to have been palatalized (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proto-Indo-European_language#Consonants) by some scholars, yet others say /ḱ/ was plain velar, while /k/ was actually /q/. Would be nice to mess around with that :P --OuWTB 12:45, tìtsotsíxë 20, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Mayhaps that does make sense :o Also do you think Chvarqvian might be a Nostratic language as well? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:19, tìtsotsíxë 20, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::There is a possibility :o --OuWTB 18:04, tìtsotsíxë 20, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::The grammar does however seem to be rather different though :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 19:19, tìtsotsíxë 20, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Maybe it is a mixed or creole variant of the Nostratic languages :o --OuWTB 03:15, tìtsotsíxë 21, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Nostratic and some highly inflecting ergative language? :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:43, tìtsotsíxë 21, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Like the non-Indo-European and non-Sino-Tibetan substrate in Báriázi? :o --OuWTB 14:38, tìtsotsíxë 21, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Maÿȟaps :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:34, tìtsotsíxë 22, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::It's getting more complicated by the day :P --OuWTB 07:25, tìtsotsíxë 22, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But it's not yet too complicated though :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 14:01, tìtsotsíxë 22, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Of course not :P --OuWTB 11:14, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Do you think this discussion would be more complicated if it were about more abstract things than languages? :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:28, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But aren't languages abstract already though? :o --OuWTB 13:31, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Perhaps abstractness is more abstract :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:32, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But what if the abstractness of abstractness is based on an abstract lie which as been made abstract by someone? :o --OuWTB 13:36, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Then the abstractness of abstractness would still be abstract :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:39, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But the abstractness itself maybe not :o --OuWTB 13:50, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Then the abstractness's abstractness wouldn't be abstract either, as the abstractness of abstractness also is a kind of abstractness :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 14:00, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But the abstractness itself would not be abstract even though it is engulfed by abstractness :o --OuWTB 14:03, tìtsotsíxë 23, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::That's exactly what I said though :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 07:39, tìtsotsíxë 24, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Abstractly seen that's true though :o --OuWTB 09:02, tìtsotsíxë 24, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Abstractly seen the truth is abstract though :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 06:18, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::But how can you know that if it's abstract though? :o --OuWTB 09:15, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Using the definitions of "truth" and "abstract" it is possible to prove whether truth is abstract or not :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 11:43, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Could you elaborate on that less abstractly? :o --OuWTB 12:23, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::That can only be elaborated on abstractly :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 12:35, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::You sure though? :o --OuWTB 12:54, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Can you think of any concrete ways to elaborate on that? :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 13:38, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::No, that's why I was asking you :o --OuWTB 18:32, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I think you're going to have to trust the mathematician this time :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 19:25, tìtsotsíxë 25, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Isn't this a linguistic issue though? :o --OuWTB 08:25, tìtsotsíxë 26, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Perhaps it is a colon-ic issue. :o 77topaz (talk) 10:38, tìtsotsíxë 26, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Please clarify :o --OuWTB 13:46, tìtsotsíxë 26, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I think it'd be better if I clarified this issue, as Tåpas's theory is wrong and his clarification therefore most likely would be wrong as well :P So, to summarise: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*It used to be a linguistic issue, but the subject changed. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*Then it became an abstract issue. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*Then Tåpas started complaining about the colons, which however are not at all annoying. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::*It thus is an abstract, issue-ic issue :o :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Is it clear now? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 16:14, tìtsotsíxë 26, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Now you've made it a tautological issue. :o 77topaz (talk) 20:25, tìtsotsíxë 26, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I think it's just become a complex issue :o --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:39, tìtsotsíxë 27, 2014 (UTC) :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::I believe you guys got an issue with this issue :o --OuWTB 08:40, tìtsotsíxë 27, 2014 (UTC) Lìkam What conjugation's that? :P --QytokantFRÅGOR??? 05:45, fernósåmar 25, 2014 (UTC) :The first :o --OuWTB 07:42, fernósåmar 25, 2014 (UTC) | |} Exactly the same :P --OuWTB 09:04, fernósåmar 25, 2014 (UTC) Smisłak dīþkē *''òcam - òkimam'' = I have fun - I masturbate. So totāla njēobscena o: -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :Hahah, "I have fun for myself" = "I masturbate", logiski è :P --OuWTB 11:30, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) "Prèia Xudž" ka da je chūtki fatche morjū (krogū) :P -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :È vètiš å "prèia xudž" ságo "free dog" nè? :P --OuWTB 12:12, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::Totāla, za machtis ta syskiþar :P -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::Men ci ságo "prèia xudž" t'à dijålektù? :o --OuWTB 12:21, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::::Sama o: ::::Dyrdjaň "preja xuč". Endå žartitam :P -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::::Hahah :P --OuWTB 12:28, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::::::A veciš da či je "mori" i "krog"? -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::::::Nô :P krog = "pub"? :P --OuWTB 12:37, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::Klýxef. "mori" samā, iš latinske fraze "in taberna mori". -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::::::::Hahaha, så skàpus moriu mežd namnum "Prèia Xudž" :o --OuWTB 12:49, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::So nomen chutkiri š "Natu Chekar" endå o: -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::::::::::Ságo "green ..."? :o --OuWTB 14:49, ñàłtipki 30, 2014 (UTC) ::::::::::::"The Blue Heron". © ::::::::::::"chekar" kana da je iš svenskām diþām "häger". ::::::::::::Måsme da povedāk Chutokantam da čāk Chvarkvijāzim diþe "cheqar" da sago samos? -- DAH BUY000R! (wall | ) :::::::::::::Ow :P :::::::::::::Nevètùm c'a šlofu :o --OuWTB 10:58, ñàłtipki 31, 2014 (UTC)